[B-Greek] Force of KAI in 1 Cor 11:23?
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Thu Feb 17 11:25:04 EST 2011
On Feb 17, 2011, at 10:32 AM, Mark Goodacre wrote:
> On 17 February 2011 09:13, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:
>> This is an interesting question. After giving it a bit of thought, I'm
>> thinking that the context in which he presents this 'traditiona" account
>> of the last supper -- as a basis for scolding the Corinthian believers for
>> abusing the ritual -- doesn't figure heavily in this "parenthetical"
>> formulation: that is, he wants them to acknowledge that this is not
>> something they haven't known about.
>> If that's right, then the implicit sense of the hO KAI might be
>> conveyed as, "This tradition is one that came to ME from the Lord --
>> and I DID pass it on to YOU" -- i.e. "you have no excuse for
>> not knowing it."
> One of the difficulties here is the terse nature of Ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον
> ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου (EGW GAR PARELABON APO TOU KURIOU) which appears
> counter-intuitive given the extreme unlikelihood that Paul was present
> "on the night he was handed over". I am wondering if ὃ καί (hO KAI)
> actually helps us to unpack some of that terse first clause. If Paul
> is saying "that which I too passed on to you", then what we are seeing
> is the implicit presence of the "passing on" also in the first clause.
> In other words, the sense is "I received from the Lord (when it was
> passed on to me) what I *also* passed on to you".
> I think 1 Cor. 15.1,3, which is closely parallel, and deals with the
> same kind of thing -- conveying of Jesus tradition to the Corinthians
> -- might help us out:
> Γνωρίζω δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν, ὃ καὶ
> παρελάβετε . . .
> GNWRIZW DE hUMIN, ADELFOI, TO EUAGGELION hO EUHGGELISAMHN hUMIN, hO
> KAI PARELABETE . . .
> Παρέδωκα γὰρ ὑμῖν ἐν πρώτοις, ὃ καὶ παρέλαβον, ὅτι Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν . . .
> PAREDWKA GAR hUMIN EN PRWTOIS, hO KAI PARELABON, hOTI CRISTOS APEQANEN . . .
> In each case the ὃ καί (hO KAI) unpacks and emphasizes what is
> implicit in the previous clause, so Paul in 1 Cor. 15.3 also received
> the tradition that he had handed on to the Corinthians and which they
> too had, of course, received. "For I passed on to you as of first
> importance (implicity: and which you received), that which I *also*
> received, that Christ died . . ."
> In other words, it looks to me like Paul uses the KAI to build on what
> is implicit in the previous clause.
On the other hand ...
(a) The phrasing in 1 Cor 11:23 has the emphatic pronoun EGW in the
main clause; this is absent in 15:3.
(b) In chapter 15 again the tradition is cited as a basis upon wich Paul
constructs his argument "contra Corinthios" about the reality of the
resurrection, as earlier about what the ritual Eucharist really means.
(c) Of course Paul cannot claim to have been present with the
disciples on the night of the betrayal, but he nevertheless claims to
have received the tradition APO KURIOU. This phrasing reminds me
of the phrasing of 1 Cor 1:11-12:
Γνωρίζω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν
ὑπ᾿ ἐμοῦ ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ ἄνθρωπον· 12 οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγὼ
παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον αὐτὸ οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην ἀλλὰ
δι᾿ ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
[Gal. 1:11 GNWRIZW GAR hUMIN, ADELFOI, TO EUAGGELION
TO EUAGGELISQEN hUP᾿ EMOU hOTI OUK ESTIN KATA ANQRWPON·
12 OUDE GAR EGW PARA ANQRWPOU PARELABON AUTO
OUTE EDIDACQHN ALLA DI᾿ APOKALUYEWS IHSOU CRISTOU.]
Of course, there's a good deal that has to be read between the lines in
Gal 1 and some may argue that there's some special pleading here in
his claim to have an altogether independent revelation of the gospel
directly from Jesus Christ -- but it does suggest that when he writes,
EGW GAR PARELABON APO TOU KURIOU, hO KAI PAREDWKA
hUMIN, hOTI hO KURIOS IHSOUS ... ,
he may very well be emphasizing the linkage in this PARADOSIS;
from the Lord -- to Paul -- to the Corinthians. I still think that the
emphatic EGW of 11:23 carries its full weight.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
More information about the B-Greek